But the argument is not so much about the size of the reported changes in the County’s tree canopy from 2011 to 2016 as with how the County has interpreted and publicized the results of the report.

If we shouldn’t be quibbling over a percentage point or two change in the tree canopy, since “reasonable people can disagree” (Board Chair Katie Cristol) in their interpretations of the report results, then why has the County been publicizing a very favorable interpretation of the supposed one percent increase, without acknowledging that reasonable people could disagree about the positive spin? For example: